quote:

Yes. Personal debt bankrolled by easy Mortgages caused the 2008 meltdown. Easy mortages were caused by the Frank Barney, democrate, with Clinton's support; remember the newspaper articles in early 2007 writing about how new homeowners were scared their one year ARM was about to reset and their payment triples? The Demos were behind that in order to buy votes from those who could not buy a house otherwise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

I do find it extraordinary that there wasn't more of a fuss about that recount being stopped when it looked like the chimp's teensy and dubious majority (there were a lot more highly dodgy absentee ballots turned in than his majority, put it that way) might be revealed as a hallucination. Still, if Gore was enough of a pussy to let it go, what can you do?
(All of this "armed insurrection" stuff that the madder elements of the Republicans camp followers have been blathering about since a Kenyan was elected, I suppose. Johnson might have been up for that in similar circumstances, but Gore? Bleah.)

quote:


Did you see where the Congressional budget Office said yesterday that unless debt is brought under control, shit is going to hit the fan big time! People on the dole better start looking for some way to EARN money. The government can't send you money from an empty box!

quote:

The looser credit is, the more consumption will be. Consumption is of course a good thing - as long as the ability (and inclination) exists to pay off the credit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
The fact that private debt is decreasing is no surprise. We've gone from credit-happiness to tight lending criteria.

And, to be honest, I cheer this change on! It was our credit-wanton-ness that fucked it all up. That was fueled by cheap credit from The Fed. I've been talking about raising interest rates for a couple years now. Try to get people to save instead of spend.
Since loans from banks are *supposed* to come from their pile of savings, wouldn't increasing those savings mean an increase in loanable funds? Huh. Go figure. Americans need to drop their consumption levels. Until we do, we'll always have issues like we are having.

I dunno. I don't look at this as a question of tight credit vs loose credit. I wonder what the optimum level of credit looseness is, so to speak.
The looser credit is, the more consumption will be. Consumption is of course a good thing - as long as the ability (and inclination) exists to pay off the credit.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

No way......the con talking points say that our debt is growing...President Obama`s fault yada yada.....

"WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Everyone knows America has too much debt. What they don’t know is that things are getting better, not worse.
Little by little, our economy is reducing its debt burden, slowly repairing the damage caused by 10, 20 or 30 years of excess.

If you want to know why economic growth has been so tepid, here’s your answer. Four years after the storm hit, the economy is still deleveraging. And it’s very hard for any economy to grow when everyone is focused on increasing their savings.

Total domestic — public and private — debt as a share of the economy has declined for 12 quarters in a row after surging over the previous decade.

The rapid rise in federal debt over the past four years has distracted us from the big picture. The level of public debt is indeed worrisome, but it’s not as big a worry as the economy’s total level of debt — public and private.
Although we have a whole cottage industry devoted to warning us about the dangers of too much public debt, we don’t have any comparable Cassandras telling us about the dangers of too much private debt. Yet the history of the past 30 years (or 300) clearly shows that too much debt, of whatever variety, can pose a systemic risk to the national and global economies.

As much as we hear politicians, pundits, tea-party patriots and the Congressional Budget Office obsessing about government debt, it was excessive private debt — not public debt — that caused the 2008 financial meltdown"

Yes. Personal debt bankrolled by easy Mortgages caused the 2008 meltdown. Easy mortages were caused by the Frank Barney, democrate, with Clinton's support; remember the newspaper articles in early 2007 writing about how new homeowners were scared their one year ARM was about to reset and their payment triples? The Demos were behind that in order to buy votes from those who could not buy a house otherwise.

That was then. Now, excess public debt and spend, spend policies and a crazy and Unconsitutional heath care plan that is anti buisness and therefore anti-jobs have frozen economic investment.

Not to worry, the Supreme Court announces their rulling by Monday nailing another nail in a sad and failed Presidency and come November the President goes lame duck and is replaced. Finally, the Democratic party purges the extreme left and comes back to a centralist policy and fields another Clintion in 2016 and by then we are not whole but where we should be.

P.S. if you can hang on. I know many are on the dole and getting ready to be pushed of it and are sweating some real economic issues and maybe even homelessness. It's getting desperate for some now as unemployment funds run out. I see whole families begging on the corners now and people getting groceries on a bicycle in dense traffic. This is a sign of more things to come before it gets better and better is not what it was before but how it will be now, back to a pre-industrial economy unless the GOP can actually reduce the debt, clear out excess repo'ed houses, entice business reinvestment with the lure of very cheap energy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

There i

quote:

I think the cons are still under the delusion that the supreme court runs things ever since they appointed bush to the presidency.....

There it is, who would have guessed. You still have not gotten over the falling chad nonesense and the fact the Supreme Court had to stop election thieft by hanging chad voting in which a Gore hanging chad was counted as a vote for him.

Hey election monitor, there's a hanging chad here over Bush's name, what do I do"?
"Leave it and punch the chad out for Gore of course and leave the other hanging. What, you want Bush to win"?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Got modded for posting to much text.......the link has the rest.

Enjoy.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-debt-load-falling-fastest-040045522.html

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
The fact that private debt is decreasing is no surprise. We've gone from credit-happiness to tight lending criteria.

And, to be honest, I cheer this change on! It was our credit-wanton-ness that fucked it all up. That was fueled by cheap credit from The Fed. I've been talking about raising interest rates for a couple years now. Try to get people to save instead of spend.
Since loans from banks are *supposed* to come from their pile of savings, wouldn't increasing those savings mean an increase in loanable funds? Huh. Go figure. Americans need to drop their consumption levels. Until we do, we'll always have issues like we are having.

I dunno. I don't look at this as a question of tight credit vs loose credit. I wonder what the optimum level of credit looseness is, so to speak.
The looser credit is, the more consumption will be. Consumption is of course a good thing - as long as the ability (and inclination) exists to pay off the credit.

While consumption is definitely good to a point, if it's being manipulated by cheap credit, that consumption is going to fall flat on its face as soon as you get back to Market-defined credit rates. I get stimulating things, but there is a difference between stimulating the economy and subsidizing the economy. People took advantage of cheap credit and when it came due and credit became tight, they were fucked.

The all-out consumerism of the general population is disgusting. We run into the problems we see when our economy is dependent on consumption and even tied to ever-increasing consumption. I have no problem with the US *not* having the world's largest economy. That's quite a ways away, but if you think about it, if we are the world's largest consumers, with only the 3rd largest population (China outpaces India, and India is about 4x the population of the US), good God, we are consuming a ridiculous amount per person compared to much of the world (considering India and China make up about 45% of the World Population, the average US Citizen consumes more than at least 45% of the average World Population). That's nuts! And, we're finding out what it will do to us.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Get over it...80% of our economy is 'consumer driven.' The facts are now, most of our consumerism puts Chinese and other nations to work...not the US work force. Their goes the neighborhood.

quote:

Get over it...80% of our economy is 'consumer driven.' The facts are now, most of our consumerism puts Chinese and other nations to work...not the US work force. Their goes the neighborhood.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

It was the way the usury was structured that put everybody in the shittter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Get over it...80% of our economy is 'consumer driven.' The facts are now, most of our consumerism puts Chinese and other nations to work...not the US work force. Their goes the neighborhood.

There also goes any hope of having an economy that isn't based on credit rather than production.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Get over it...80% of our economy is 'consumer driven.' The facts are now, most of our consumerism puts Chinese and other nations to work...not the US work force. Their goes the neighborhood.

There also goes any hope of having an economy that isn't based on credit rather than production.

So much for supply side economics, heh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Get over it...80% of our economy is 'consumer driven.' The facts are now, most of our consumerism puts Chinese and other nations to work...not the US work force. Their goes the neighborhood.

There also goes any hope of having an economy that isn't based on credit rather than production.

So much for supply side economics, heh?

Since the 60's the American largess has been shared less and less with labor. Soon, we'll owe ourselves to the company store.

quote:


Since the 60's the American largess has been shared less and less with labor. Soon, we'll owe ourselves to the company store.